Is Too Much Attention Spent On Swing Mechanics (at the amateur level)

[johnrobison]

Of course its weight is providing momentum. That's basic physics. You said that you have to allow the weight of the kettle bell to track an arc and that if you use your muscles, you'll hurt yourself. That's incorrect. The only reason the kettle bell is tracking an arc is because you're using your muscles. You're acting against gravity to keep the kettle bell from dropping to the ground. You're applying a great deal of force to swing it upward. The same thing happens in a golf swing - we apply a large amount of force to make the club go where it needs to go. Without us applying that force, the club drops to the ground.

 

You're being overly literal. The point was to not interrupt the momentum by trying to force the club back and through. You utilize the weight and momentum, not try to force it through with your muscles.

Momentum is the product of mass and velocity. Virtually all of the club's velocity comes from the force the golfer applies to it. The club's momentum, therefore, is a result of the golfer's actions. You're not interrupting - you're producing.

[TB07]

Of course its weight is providing momentum. That's basic physics. You said that you have to allow the weight of the kettle bell to track an arc and that if you use your muscles, you'll hurt yourself. That's incorrect. The only reason the kettle bell is tracking an arc is because you're using your muscles. You're acting against gravity to keep the kettle bell from dropping to the ground. You're applying a great deal of force to swing it upward. The same thing happens in a golf swing - we apply a large amount of force to make the club go where it needs to go. Without us applying that force, the club drops to the ground.

 

You're being overly literal. The point was to not interrupt the momentum by trying to force the club back and through. You utilize the weight and momentum, not try to force it through with your muscles.

Momentum is the product of mass and velocity. Virtually all of the club's velocity comes from the force the golfer applies to it. The club's momentum, therefore, is a result of the golfer's actions. You're not interrupting - you're producing.

 

He obviously doesn’t understand that his feels/thoughts and reality aren’t the same thing.

[thug the bunny]

I think you guys should cut wades some slack. I think each and every one of us knows what he means by his gravity swing. He simply means not jerking/lurching using our muscles from the top but instead slowly unwinding and following the club's natural gravitational acceleration esp through the 9:00 position (I don't know and refuse to learn P positions), and the applying willful muscle at the bottom. Of course the muscles are active during this entire process, of course your base and torso and shoulders are active. He's simply emphasizing not overusing the muscles, esp the arm/hand muscles until the right time. And yes of course if you pull the clubhead back to 2:00 it's going to go up initially to go through the 12:00 position on the way down but that doesn't invalidate the feel that you are using gravity coming down into the ball. If you literally used only gravity from the top the club would fall onto the back of your neck. Let's not be silly here.

[FourTops]

I think you guys should cut wades some slack. I think each and every one of us knows what he means by his gravity swing. He simply means not jerking/lurching using our muscles from the top but instead slowly unwinding and following the club's natural gravitational acceleration esp through the 9:00 position (I don't know and refuse to learn P positions), and the applying willful muscle at the bottom. Of course the muscles are active during this entire process, of course your base and torso and shoulders are active. He's simply emphasizing not overusing the muscles, esp the arm/hand muscles until the right time. And yes of course if you pull the clubhead back to 2:00 it's going to go up initially to go through the 12:00 position on the way down but that doesn't invalidate the feel that you are using gravity coming down into the ball. If you literally used only gravity from the top the club would fall onto the back of your neck. Let's not be silly here.

 

Agree. And I think you were talking about the P 6.2543 position. LOL. There's a natural instinct to apply excess force, grip the club far too hard. The result is the person doing far more work than the club.

 

If I throw you a whiffle ball and ask you to throw it back, what do you do first? You naturally...without thinking...catch the ball (eye hand coordination)....then in a millisecond you'd gauge the weight of the ball in your hand....glance at the return throw distance...and 99% of the time....throw it back on target. Right after that, I could throw a horseshoe....and the same millisecond calculations would occur with the same 99% return throw outcome. Now imagine gripping a whiffle ball with a death grip...tense arms...shoulders...then trying to throw the ball back? Not so easy because feel is lost...not to mention the muscles lose fluidity of motion. It's why folks go to the PGASS and "try" to swing "faster" and end up swinging slower.

 

My point is while mechanics are fine....that type of instruction can induce tension...especially for folks who have not mastered the fundamentals, or who can't hit a 30 yard pitch 99% of the time within a 10 foot radius.

[TB07]

I think you guys should cut wades some slack. I think each and every one of us knows what he means by his gravity swing. He simply means not jerking/lurching using our muscles from the top but instead slowly unwinding and following the club's natural gravitational acceleration esp through the 9:00 position (I don't know and refuse to learn P positions), and the applying willful muscle at the bottom. Of course the muscles are active during this entire process, of course your base and torso and shoulders are active. He's simply emphasizing not overusing the muscles, esp the arm/hand muscles until the right time. And yes of course if you pull the clubhead back to 2:00 it's going to go up initially to go through the 12:00 position on the way down but that doesn't invalidate the feel that you are using gravity coming down into the ball. If you literally used only gravity from the top the club would fall onto the back of your neck. Let's not be silly here.

 

Agree. And I think you were talking about the P 6.2543 position. LOL. There's a natural instinct to apply excess force, grip the club far too hard. The result is the person doing far more work than the club.

 

If I throw you a whiffle ball and ask you to throw it back, what do you do first? You naturally...without thinking...catch the ball (eye hand coordination)....then in a millisecond you'd gauge the weight of the ball in your hand....glance at the return throw distance...and 99% of the time....throw it back on target. Right after that, I could throw a horseshoe....and the same millisecond calculations would occur with the same 99% return throw outcome. Now imagine gripping a whiffle ball with a death grip...tense arms...shoulders...then trying to throw the ball back? Not so easy because feel is lost...not to mention the muscles lose fluidity of motion. It's why folks go to the PGASS and "try" to swing "faster" and end up swinging slower.

 

My point is while mechanics are fine....that type of instruction can induce tension...especially for folks who have not mastered the fundamentals, or who can't hit a 30 yard pitch 99% of the time within a 10 foot radius.

 

This is such a flawed argument it’s not even funny.

[FourTops]

I think you guys should cut wades some slack. I think each and every one of us knows what he means by his gravity swing. He simply means not jerking/lurching using our muscles from the top but instead slowly unwinding and following the club's natural gravitational acceleration esp through the 9:00 position (I don't know and refuse to learn P positions), and the applying willful muscle at the bottom. Of course the muscles are active during this entire process, of course your base and torso and shoulders are active. He's simply emphasizing not overusing the muscles, esp the arm/hand muscles until the right time. And yes of course if you pull the clubhead back to 2:00 it's going to go up initially to go through the 12:00 position on the way down but that doesn't invalidate the feel that you are using gravity coming down into the ball. If you literally used only gravity from the top the club would fall onto the back of your neck. Let's not be silly here.

 

Agree. And I think you were talking about the P 6.2543 position. LOL. There's a natural instinct to apply excess force, grip the club far too hard. The result is the person doing far more work than the club.

 

If I throw you a whiffle ball and ask you to throw it back, what do you do first? You naturally...without thinking...catch the ball (eye hand coordination)....then in a millisecond you'd gauge the weight of the ball in your hand....glance at the return throw distance...and 99% of the time....throw it back on target. Right after that, I could throw a horseshoe....and the same millisecond calculations would occur with the same 99% return throw outcome. Now imagine gripping a whiffle ball with a death grip...tense arms...shoulders...then trying to throw the ball back? Not so easy because feel is lost...not to mention the muscles lose fluidity of motion. It's why folks go to the PGASS and "try" to swing "faster" and end up swinging slower.

 

My point is while mechanics are fine....that type of instruction can induce tension...especially for folks who have not mastered the fundamentals, or who can't hit a 30 yard pitch 99% of the time within a 10 foot radius.

 

This is such a flawed argument it's not even funny.

 

Read Ernest Jones and Percy Boomers books at get back to me. The proliferation of over-thinking, bad swing advice is why handicaps have barely improved over the last 20 years.

[Jim Waldron]

Jim Waldron:

 

Flinch factor? What's that? I was taught to swing the club to the target while doing my best to ignore the golf ball. Same thing?

 

Steve

 

No. How you focus your mind and what you focus on is one thing. A flinch is the body's response to a perceived threat of any kind, ie a stress response to protect you from that threat.

 

Hitting a bad shot is considered a threat by 99.9% of golfers and they are trying really hard emotionally to NOT let that bad shot happen. And that causes certain muscles to quickly tighten which is the literal flinch.

 

A flinch is a mild intensity yip and a yip is a high intensity flinch, two ends of the flinch spectrum.

 

Tons of conflation happening on this thread, ie folks confusing their internal subjective psyche state for external material reality.

 

Of course you have to train your body to learn how to execute the proper mechanics, which is at least 95% NOT natural. But once the body has been trained, your body can simply FAIL to execute those good mechanics due to fear, anxiety, a wandering mind, doubt, loss of confidence, lack of commitment, lack of trust, etc, etc....the list is a long one.

 

What we have today is a culture of golf instruction dominated by marketing strategies/concepts and a high tech worldview suffering from a fatal weakness, which is in philosophical terms is called "reductionism". It means a mostly descriptive account of what a tour pros is doing with his body and club motion. It is a great resource for swing researchers/teaching pros to base their own understanding around from an objective point of view but it is NOT the same thing as what happens in the brain-mind of a good player in the act of striking a golf ball to a target. And not even close....

[johnrobison]

I think you guys should cut wades some slack. I think each and every one of us knows what he means by his gravity swing. He simply means not jerking/lurching using our muscles from the top but instead slowly unwinding and following the club's natural gravitational acceleration esp through the 9:00 position (I don't know and refuse to learn P positions), and the applying willful muscle at the bottom. Of course the muscles are active during this entire process, of course your base and torso and shoulders are active. He's simply emphasizing not overusing the muscles, esp the arm/hand muscles until the right time. And yes of course if you pull the clubhead back to 2:00 it's going to go up initially to go through the 12:00 position on the way down but that doesn't invalidate the feel that you are using gravity coming down into the ball. If you literally used only gravity from the top the club would fall onto the back of your neck. Let's not be silly here.

 

Agree. And I think you were talking about the P 6.2543 position. LOL. There's a natural instinct to apply excess force, grip the club far too hard. The result is the person doing far more work than the club.

 

If I throw you a whiffle ball and ask you to throw it back, what do you do first? You naturally...without thinking...catch the ball (eye hand coordination)....then in a millisecond you'd gauge the weight of the ball in your hand....glance at the return throw distance...and 99% of the time....throw it back on target. Right after that, I could throw a horseshoe....and the same millisecond calculations would occur with the same 99% return throw outcome. Now imagine gripping a whiffle ball with a death grip...tense arms...shoulders...then trying to throw the ball back? Not so easy because feel is lost...not to mention the muscles lose fluidity of motion. It's why folks go to the PGASS and "try" to swing "faster" and end up swinging slower.

 

My point is while mechanics are fine....that type of instruction can induce tension...especially for folks who have not mastered the fundamentals, or who can't hit a 30 yard pitch 99% of the time within a 10 foot radius.

I'm not even sure how to respond to either of your replies. Tell me if I got this right... What your'e saying is that when he said you don't use your muscles, just use the club's momentum (whatever that even means), what he really meant was that, of course you have to apply *some* force with your own muscles, just not *too much* force. That's really helpful.

 

And how should I reconcile that with the original discussion question. Are you saying that, of course you should focus on mechanics, just not too much. Also helpful.

 

And, no, I wouldn't say that we all no what he means by "gravity swing" since he quite clearly said that if you try to swing a kettle bell on an arc by using your muscles, you'll hurt yourself.

[Nard_S]

Of course you have to train your body to learn how to execute the proper mechanics, which is at least 95% NOT natural.- JW

 

^+1....^+1....^+1....^+1....^+1....^+1....

[Jim Waldron]

The clear and total separation of learning mechanics from the art of fighting is a widespread and proven concept in the Asian martial arts tradition.

 

Slow motion mirror training is the heart of the "how do I learn this" model in that tradition. Then when actually fighting, there is a shift of consciousness to a much more reactive, athletic mindset featuring qualities like commitment, trust, surrender, freedom, confidence, narrowly focused mind on your opponent (the target), etc.

 

When I was 11, and in my first few months of training as a karate student with one of the top martial arts instructors in the world, when we were sparring, he would say to me "Tumishigo, Waldron-san!", several times.

 

After a month of this I said to him, "Sensei - what does that Japanese word you keep saying to me when we spar actually mean? Is it a karate term or a Zen term?".

 

He looked at me with a strange look on his face and then said "NOT Japanese - English! Too much ego! You are clearly thinking about the mechanics of how to kick, punch and block. It makes your body move too slowly to be able to respond to my attack. Your body can only move quickly and properly without thinking, you must trust your instincts and react."

[thug the bunny]

 

Agree. And I think you were talking about the P 6.2543 position. LOL. There's a natural instinct to apply excess force, grip the club far too hard. The result is the person doing far more work than the club.

 

If I throw you a whiffle ball and ask you to throw it back, what do you do first? You naturally...without thinking...catch the ball (eye hand coordination)....then in a millisecond you'd gauge the weight of the ball in your hand....glance at the return throw distance...and 99% of the time....throw it back on target. Right after that, I could throw a horseshoe....and the same millisecond calculations would occur with the same 99% return throw outcome. Now imagine gripping a whiffle ball with a death grip...tense arms...shoulders...then trying to throw the ball back? Not so easy because feel is lost...not to mention the muscles lose fluidity of motion. It's why folks go to the PGASS and "try" to swing "faster" and end up swinging slower.

 

My point is while mechanics are fine....that type of instruction can induce tension...especially for folks who have not mastered the fundamentals, or who can't hit a 30 yard pitch 99% of the time within a 10 foot radius.

 

 

I do know how to respond to your reply

 

I'm not even sure how to respond to either of your replies. Tell me if I got this right... What your'e saying is that when he said you don't use your muscles, just use the club's momentum (whatever that even means), what he really meant was that, of course you have to apply *some* force with your own muscles, just not *too much* force.

 

That is correct. Momentum is mv*2, mass x velocity squared. So using the momentum you start from the top (mostly with legs and shoulders), just follow that naturally aided by gravity down into the ball. Add muscle as desired and as is controllable. You say that is not helpful, but there you have it. Describing something as dynamic as a good golf swing which is fast and variable in both time and space is tough.

 

And how should I reconcile that with the original discussion question. Are you saying that, of course you should focus on mechanics, just not too much. Also helpful.

 

That is also correct.

 

And, no, I wouldn't say that we all no what he means by "gravity swing" since he quite clearly said that if you try to swing a kettle bell on an arc by using your muscles, you'll hurt yourself.

 

 

Yeah, not sure about the kettle ball analogy, but whatever.

 

Look, all I know is most bad golfers I have seen in over 30 yrs of playing try to muscle the ball out there, and try to put all the clubhead speed into the first 1/3 of the swing. I have learned to let the club 'drop' during that first 1/3 of the swing and take my time getting to the ball. To me, it FEELS like I am just letting gravity do the work. That's all.

[Swingman420]

Wow. It really is a fascinating discussion. The thing I would like to add is that a swinging motion is not subjective and those advocating it on this thread tend to catch flak via the all too common. The Stone Age mentality of teaching based on swing thoughts and drills doesn’t cut it.

 

[Jim Waldron]

In response to Graybacks post - A really big part of how I teach the game is based on the concept of finding ways to "flinch-proof" your swing or stroke. And that is mainly about Awareness and noticing what mental states tend to cause the flinch and those that tend to inhibit the flinch.

 

It is one of the "pillars" of my Yips Cure Program, which has totally eliminated the yips - including Sir Charles level intensity yips - for over 90% of my yip students.

 

Since swing changes that involve moving body parts are never a choice (since the conscious mind simply does not have the ability to move any body part with precision that is also moving at high speed), it is essential to embrace the concept of NOT trying to change your swing in the middle of the swing, or in the middle of the round.

 

Play that day with the swing you have (hopefully with a one way miss!) and learn how to flinch proof your swing and stroke patterns, that is the art of playing the game of golf in a nutshell....

 

 

And if having a two way miss is driving you nuts, take time off from playing for a few weeks, find a good teacher and fix your swing so you only have a one way miss....

[ThinkingPlus]

That is correct. Momentum is mv*2, mass x velocity squared. So using the momentum you start from the top (mostly with legs and shoulders), just follow that naturally aided by gravity down into the ball. Add muscle as desired and as is controllable. You say that is not helpful, but there you have it. Describing something as dynamic as a good golf swing which is fast and variable in both time and space is tough.

TB,

 

Momentum = Mass * Velocity

Energy = 1/2 * Mass * Velocity^2

[FourTops]

So, do folks muscle a sledgehammer.....or use the weight of the hammer by guiding the hammer with body movement to the railroad tie spike?

[thug the bunny]

That is correct. Momentum is mv*2, mass x velocity squared. So using the momentum you start from the top (mostly with legs and shoulders), just follow that naturally aided by gravity down into the ball. Add muscle as desired and as is controllable. You say that is not helpful, but there you have it. Describing something as dynamic as a good golf swing which is fast and variable in both time and space is tough.

TB,

 

Momentum = Mass * Velocity

Energy = 1/2 * Mass * Velocity^2

 

Oops. I knew I should have researched my basic physics with a fellow scientist on board. Point is he said 'momentum, whatever that is', and I wanted to point out it's just a product of mass and velocity.

[ThinkingPlus]

That is correct. Momentum is mv*2, mass x velocity squared. So using the momentum you start from the top (mostly with legs and shoulders), just follow that naturally aided by gravity down into the ball. Add muscle as desired and as is controllable. You say that is not helpful, but there you have it. Describing something as dynamic as a good golf swing which is fast and variable in both time and space is tough.

TB,

 

Momentum = Mass * Velocity

Energy = 1/2 * Mass * Velocity^2

 

Oops. I knew I should have researched my basic physics with a fellow scientist on board. Point is he said 'momentum, whatever that is', and I wanted to point out it's just a product of mass and velocity.

Understand. Just providing peer review. :)

[Jim Waldron]

One great analogy for understanding how swing changes are made, and how that affects the art of playing the game is this: for a "swing thought" to work when moving at normal swing speeds, there has to be an existing motor program already installed on your computer hard drive, ie subconscious mind or SM. Then the swing thought is the equivalent of pressing the Enter key on your keyboard, it triggers the program.

 

But how most mid to high cappers understand the term swing thought, it's like never ever having installed that program on the SM hard drive (failure to learn and train) and yet repeatedly pressing the Enter key and wondering why the program does not start.

 

A related issue is the widespread ignorance in Western culture about things like Awareness and internal state control. I do an exercise I have written about a few times on this forum with every new student, and not just yip students, everyone - called the Three Sensory Channels exercise. I place my hand on the students shoulder and they look at my hand, close their eyes and imagine my hand, ie they "see" an internal visual image in their mind of my hand on their shoulder. I then ask "Which seems more real to you now - a few seconds ago when you looked at my hand with your eyes, or the image in your head?"

 

So far 80% of my students have responded " the image in my head seems more real".

 

Which is really, truly quite stunning.....when I point out to them that the image in their head is a MEMORY of an actual real event, ie my real physical hand touching their real physical shoulder, and a memory is NOT the same thing as the event that triggered the memory, they start to get it....

 

A related story happened to my wife recently at a seminar for health care professionals, an expert on the brain and trauma was lecturing, gesturing with both hands about the parts of the brain, and in the midst of her explaining "brain this and brain that" she said the following phrase: "....this is your brain." Full stop...then she asked her audience, "Please raise your hand if you just heard me say 'this is your brain on drugs'. My wife told me that well over half the room raised their hands. The lecturer then pointed out that she never added "..on drugs" and yet scores of folks in that room thought they heard her actually say "....on drugs".

 

For those too young to get it, there was a very popular TV ad back in the 80"s called "This is your brain on drugs". So those folks projected the "on drugs" part based on their memory of that ad, but conflated their internal mental state that had that memory with actual external physical reality of the lecturer saying that phrase. Which of course she did not. Had to play the video back to some very stubborn attendees who swore she actually said it.....

 

Which brings me to my point which is that as human beings we all live in two different worlds simultaneously: the real physical or external material world of objects in 3D space (along with time the 4th dimension) that science studies, and our internal subjective world of our perceptions, awareness, thoughts, values, beliefs, emotions, etc. It is very easy to conflate those two worlds, and when one does do that, it tends to create problems.

 

I was talking about this with a friend in Hawaii last year and he said to me "Jim - I'm sorry but I think you are wrong about this, there is only one world" and my response was "So you think when you die the entire universe dies with you?".

 

What you want in golf are "swing realities" NOT "swing thoughts". You want awareness for what your body is actually doing - not what it "should" be doing. Awareness of what is actually happening with your body and club motion is the first step to being able to change it for the better.

[johnrobison]

That is correct. Momentum is mv*2, mass x velocity squared. So using the momentum you start from the top (mostly with legs and shoulders), just follow that naturally aided by gravity down into the ball. Add muscle as desired and as is controllable. You say that is not helpful, but there you have it. Describing something as dynamic as a good golf swing which is fast and variable in both time and space is tough.

TB,

 

Momentum = Mass * Velocity

Energy = 1/2 * Mass * Velocity^2

 

Oops. I knew I should have researched my basic physics with a fellow scientist on board. Point is he said 'momentum, whatever that is', and I wanted to point out it's just a product of mass and velocity.

Ya. I know what momentum is and had made that clear earlier. But I don't know what he means when he talks about using the club's momentum and gravity and saying that the golfer is not solely responsible for forcing the club back and through the ball. What can that possibly mean other than the club dropping to the ground? It absolutely is the golfer's responsibility and the golfer's actions. Gravity won't do it for you. And, as I stated earlier, the club's momentum comes from the force applied by the golfer. It won't happen on its own. It's not about using gravity as an aid and adding muscle as appropriate. It's virtually entirely dependent on applying force with your muscles. TB07 was spot on when he said that what the guy feels/thinks he's doing is not what is actually happening. That's an important distinction to make.

[thug the bunny]

That is correct. Momentum is mv*2, mass x velocity squared. So using the momentum you start from the top (mostly with legs and shoulders), just follow that naturally aided by gravity down into the ball. Add muscle as desired and as is controllable. You say that is not helpful, but there you have it. Describing something as dynamic as a good golf swing which is fast and variable in both time and space is tough.

TB,

 

Momentum = Mass * Velocity

Energy = 1/2 * Mass * Velocity^2

 

Oops. I knew I should have researched my basic physics with a fellow scientist on board. Point is he said 'momentum, whatever that is', and I wanted to point out it's just a product of mass and velocity.

Understand. Just providing peer review. :)

 

I did like your comment that the 1st derivative of acceleration (if a positive value) = jerking. Meaning that if you are accelerating your acceleration, you are jerking the club. Gravity, on the other hand, accelerates at a uniform rate, and the 1st derivative (2nd derivative of velocity) would be 0. Hope I'm right on that one (I'm just a chemist).

[thug the bunny]

That is correct. Momentum is mv*2, mass x velocity squared. So using the momentum you start from the top (mostly with legs and shoulders), just follow that naturally aided by gravity down into the ball. Add muscle as desired and as is controllable. You say that is not helpful, but there you have it. Describing something as dynamic as a good golf swing which is fast and variable in both time and space is tough.

TB,

 

Momentum = Mass * Velocity

Energy = 1/2 * Mass * Velocity^2

 

Oops. I knew I should have researched my basic physics with a fellow scientist on board. Point is he said 'momentum, whatever that is', and I wanted to point out it's just a product of mass and velocity.

Ya. I know what momentum is and had made that clear earlier. But I don't know what he means when he talks about using the club's momentum and gravity and saying that the golfer is not solely responsible for forcing the club back and through the ball. What can that possibly mean other than the club dropping to the ground? It absolutely is the golfer's responsibility and the golfer's actions. Gravity won't do it for you. And, as I stated earlier, the club's momentum comes from the force applied by the golfer. It won't happen on its own. It's not about using gravity as an aid and adding muscle as appropriate. It's virtually entirely dependent on applying force with your muscles. TB07 was spot on when he said that what the guy feels/thinks he's doing is not what is actually happening. That's an important distinction to make.

 

I could absolutely hit a decent shot simply from the weight of the clubhead and my arms going down and through the ball. Yes, I would use my 'muscles' to guide that descent, but without adding to the natural acceleration of the club.

 

But OK, go ahead and try to hit it as hard as you can...

[ThinkingPlus]

That is correct. Momentum is mv*2, mass x velocity squared. So using the momentum you start from the top (mostly with legs and shoulders), just follow that naturally aided by gravity down into the ball. Add muscle as desired and as is controllable. You say that is not helpful, but there you have it. Describing something as dynamic as a good golf swing which is fast and variable in both time and space is tough.

TB,

 

Momentum = Mass * Velocity

Energy = 1/2 * Mass * Velocity^2

 

Oops. I knew I should have researched my basic physics with a fellow scientist on board. Point is he said 'momentum, whatever that is', and I wanted to point out it's just a product of mass and velocity.

Understand. Just providing peer review. :)

 

I did like your comment that the 1st derivative of acceleration (if a positive value) = jerking. Meaning that if you are accelerating your acceleration, you are jerking the club. Gravity, on the other hand, accelerates at a uniform rate, and the 1st derivative (2nd derivative of velocity) would be 0. Hope I'm right on that one (I'm just a chemist).

Yes. Jerk really is da/dt. Real mechanical term that MEs and occasionally physicists worry about.

[johnrobison]

That is correct. Momentum is mv*2, mass x velocity squared. So using the momentum you start from the top (mostly with legs and shoulders), just follow that naturally aided by gravity down into the ball. Add muscle as desired and as is controllable. You say that is not helpful, but there you have it. Describing something as dynamic as a good golf swing which is fast and variable in both time and space is tough.

TB,

 

Momentum = Mass * Velocity

Energy = 1/2 * Mass * Velocity^2

 

Oops. I knew I should have researched my basic physics with a fellow scientist on board. Point is he said 'momentum, whatever that is', and I wanted to point out it's just a product of mass and velocity.

Ya. I know what momentum is and had made that clear earlier. But I don't know what he means when he talks about using the club's momentum and gravity and saying that the golfer is not solely responsible for forcing the club back and through the ball. What can that possibly mean other than the club dropping to the ground? It absolutely is the golfer's responsibility and the golfer's actions. Gravity won't do it for you. And, as I stated earlier, the club's momentum comes from the force applied by the golfer. It won't happen on its own. It's not about using gravity as an aid and adding muscle as appropriate. It's virtually entirely dependent on applying force with your muscles. TB07 was spot on when he said that what the guy feels/thinks he's doing is not what is actually happening. That's an important distinction to make.

 

I could absolutely hit a decent shot simply from the weight of the clubhead and my arms going down and through the ball. Yes, I would use my 'muscles' to guide that descent, but without adding to the natural acceleration of the club.

 

But OK, go ahead and try to hit it as hard as you can...

What you feel you are doing and what you’re actually doing aren’t the same.

 

Through gravity alone, the club won’t have much speed to hit a decent shot (not decent by most measures) and, the muscles that are guiding the decent, as you say, are contributing significant speed and force to the ball.

 

Despite what it feels like to you, trying to hit it hard is actually how it works.

[wmblake2000]

From calculus to consciousness. Lots of dense stuff here.

[thug the bunny]

I already said it FEELS like I'm using gravity. What swing thought/feel is actually executed? I remember clearly a vid by I think it was Justin Rose saying he feels like he puts an 'arm swing' on the ball, yet his slo mo vid showed clearly he doesn't do this. Everyone on WRX knows that feel is not real, but what is important is what feel produces what result? The main thing is INTENT to get a desired result. If I INTEND to use gravity to start my swing, of course I'm not actually doing that (unless it's a soft little chip or pitch), but the important thing is I'm not lurching from the top.

[Swingman420]

I think EJ wrote something along the lines that the swing is something one MUST feel and that pictures of body positions present in good swings is of little practical application in teaching others to play well.

Feel is not real is a popular mantra for many who espouse thousands of hours spent repeating positions.

Lots of marketing/politics in golf.

I’ll say it again you must understand what it is you are trying to do. Then you must focus on that task and only that task.

As a person with vast experience in teaching I find that most of what I see in golf instruction is doomed before it even begins.

 

Chaka

 

[TB07]

I think you guys should cut wades some slack. I think each and every one of us knows what he means by his gravity swing. He simply means not jerking/lurching using our muscles from the top but instead slowly unwinding and following the club's natural gravitational acceleration esp through the 9:00 position (I don't know and refuse to learn P positions), and the applying willful muscle at the bottom. Of course the muscles are active during this entire process, of course your base and torso and shoulders are active. He's simply emphasizing not overusing the muscles, esp the arm/hand muscles until the right time. And yes of course if you pull the clubhead back to 2:00 it's going to go up initially to go through the 12:00 position on the way down but that doesn't invalidate the feel that you are using gravity coming down into the ball. If you literally used only gravity from the top the club would fall onto the back of your neck. Let's not be silly here.

 

Agree. And I think you were talking about the P 6.2543 position. LOL. There's a natural instinct to apply excess force, grip the club far too hard. The result is the person doing far more work than the club.

 

If I throw you a whiffle ball and ask you to throw it back, what do you do first? You naturally...without thinking...catch the ball (eye hand coordination)....then in a millisecond you'd gauge the weight of the ball in your hand....glance at the return throw distance...and 99% of the time....throw it back on target. Right after that, I could throw a horseshoe....and the same millisecond calculations would occur with the same 99% return throw outcome. Now imagine gripping a whiffle ball with a death grip...tense arms...shoulders...then trying to throw the ball back? Not so easy because feel is lost...not to mention the muscles lose fluidity of motion. It's why folks go to the PGASS and "try" to swing "faster" and end up swinging slower.

 

My point is while mechanics are fine....that type of instruction can induce tension...especially for folks who have not mastered the fundamentals, or who can't hit a 30 yard pitch 99% of the time within a 10 foot radius.

 

This is such a flawed argument it's not even funny.

 

Read Ernest Jones and Percy Boomers books at get back to me. The proliferation of over-thinking, bad swing advice is why handicaps have barely improved over the last 20 years.

 

I’ve read both. Thanks

[wadesworld]

Ya. I know what momentum is and had made that clear earlier. But I don't know what he means when he talks about using the club's momentum and gravity and saying that the golfer is not solely responsible for forcing the club back and through the ball. What can that possibly mean other than the club dropping to the ground? It absolutely is the golfer's responsibility and the golfer's actions. Gravity won't do it for you. And, as I stated earlier, the club's momentum comes from the force applied by the golfer. It won't happen on its own. It's not about using gravity as an aid and adding muscle as appropriate. It's virtually entirely dependent on applying force with your muscles. TB07 was spot on when he said that what the guy feels/thinks he's doing is not what is actually happening. That's an important distinction to make.

 

If I'm not clear enough in explaining the difference between allowing the club to swing versus manipulating the club and trying to place it on the ball, I'm not sure what additional explanation or metaphor I can give that would satisfy you.

[WILDTHING]

Ya. I know what momentum is and had made that clear earlier. But I don't know what he means when he talks about using the club's momentum and gravity and saying that the golfer is not solely responsible for forcing the club back and through the ball. What can that possibly mean other than the club dropping to the ground? It absolutely is the golfer's responsibility and the golfer's actions. Gravity won't do it for you. And, as I stated earlier, the club's momentum comes from the force applied by the golfer. It won't happen on its own. It's not about using gravity as an aid and adding muscle as appropriate. It's virtually entirely dependent on applying force with your muscles. TB07 was spot on when he said that what the guy feels/thinks he's doing is not what is actually happening. That's an important distinction to make.

 

It's very difficult to try and explain the 'How' using 'What' .

 

Using words like 'feel gravity' to help swing the club would give the impression (to a science minded golfer) that you are just letting the club fall due to the pull of the earth. However , the golf teacher could use less abstract terms like ' feel the dynamic weight of the club' or 'feel the G-forces' , or 'feel the centrifugal force' (a pseudo force) or 'feel the inertia of the clubhead' to help the golfer interpret more accurately their intended meaning.

 

Unfortunately , in golf we have a plethora of similar words being used that can be interpreted differently, example being 'Release' . Ask someone what 'Release' means in the golf swing and you can get a whole variety of definitions.

 

Yes , forces and torques are used to move the club but the 'What' has an almost infinite number of permutations/combinations and open to opinion. I prefer Shawn Clement and Gabriele Wulf concept of learning 'How' using external focus cues because it has been researched and proven to work better than 'internal focus learning'.

[jbw749]

From calculus to consciousness. Lots of dense stuff here.

 

Including a spelling error in the title to.